Search

The notion of politeness is closely connected with communication control as one of its important mechanisms, which, however, has not been thoroughly researched in academic literature. In the present paper, we view this mechanism through the prism of communication monitoring, defined as a social negotiation instrument aimed at the speaker's self-control and regulation of other people's verbal and nonverbal behaviour. The study employs a complex of qualitative methods including observation, definition analysis, discourse analysis and introspection. Drawing upon the data of over 1500 communicative situations in English and Russian, we distinguish the prognostic, diagnostic, regulative, corrective, and reflexive functions of monitoring, as well as the function of conflict resolution. The connection between monitoring and politeness is determined by the existence of social constraints and the necessity to observe established rules and norms. The presence of multiple communication variables makes it possible to distinguish different types of monitoring: (i) horizontal vs. vertical monitoring; (ii) self-monitoring vs. monitoring of others; (iii) verbal vs. nonverbal monitoring; (iv) oral vs. written monitoring; (v) explicit vs. implicit monitoring; (vi) pre-monitoring vs. concurrent monitoring vs. post-monitoring; (vii) direct vs. mediated monitoring; and (viii) overt vs. covert monitoring. (Im)politeness is manifested in all the types through the choice of words and communication strategies, observance or violation of conversational rules, and different forms of nonverbal behaviour. These findings can lead to their practical application and help to enhance the effectiveness and quality of human interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper aimes to the introduction into scientific circulation of the materials of the Zhigulyovsk I settlement excavation, which was explored in 2017 by the expedition of the Agency for the Preservation of the Historical and Cultural Heritage of the Samara Region under the leadership of V.A. Tsybin. The research presents the grouping of ceramics according to external signs and description of technological characteristics of some stages of the pottery process. The technical and technological analysis of ceramics included the determination of the characteristics of the raw material, the traditions of forming paste, the nature of the surface treatment and the firing of the vessels. The materials of settlement refer to the classical variant of the southern sites of the Imenkovo culture, but in the ceramic complex there are distinguished ceramics groups that differ in appearance (external culture of the vessels) and in the manufacturing technique (internal culture of the vessels). These differences are probably related to the chronological development of pottery of Imenkovo culture and reflect both the natural evolution of pottery skills in time and the infusion of certain components at different stages of this development.

The article is devoted to the analysis of pottery traditions of the population associated with the existence of “long houses” on Staraya-Maina hillfort (Ulyanovsk Oblast), dated by the Great Migration Period. The research is based on the ceramic collection found on the hillfort during the excavations in 1990–1991. This paper presents a typological description of vessels and the results of technological analysis conducted by the author according to A. A. Bobrinsky’s method. The analysis revealed two massive pottery traditions, one of which was widely known on Imenkovo culture settlements, while the second one was a new discovery. The author suggests that this group of ceramics might be associated with an inflow of population from the Middle Oka region and from the Oka-Sura region in the fifth century AD, which brought the typical complex of garnishments of Ryazan-Oka type to the Middle Volga region.